A document signed in Washington extended a contract for a government aerospace research program. The company working under the contract received three more months, through December 2010.
The document records an administrative decision, not a discovery. Still, it leaves two obvious questions: Why was more time needed, and what did the company do during the extension? The document offers no answers. What is clear is that the added time came with no additional funding and no change to the work specified in the contract.
More Time Through December
The contract was due to end on September 22, 2010. The document, signed on September 28, pushed the end date to December 21, extending the contract period by three months.
The contract was with Bigelow Aerospace, which provided support to a research program run by an intelligence agency within the U.S. Department of Defense. You don’t need to know the company to understand the document’s main point: it extended the period during which support was provided under the contract.
What Was the Work?
The research program dealt with topics related to aerospace. Its scope included technical research areas intended to examine potential threats in aerospace over decades. But this document does not detail what the company actually did during the extension.
Nor does it present new research or a change to the program. Its limited purpose was to extend the period of work. The document says no additional funding was required and no other changes were made to the contract. In other words, the company got more time to carry out the existing work, not a new assignment.
What Remains Unknown
The document does not explain why the extension was needed or what activities took place during the additional months. The only explanation it provides is that the contract was extended without a change in scope or additional funding.
Three months were added to the contract. The reason they were needed remains outside the document.
